From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [RFC] scsi host sysfs support again [0/4] Date: 06 May 2003 11:28:26 -0500 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1052238508.1819.42.camel@mulgrave> References: <20030505083315.GB8416@beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nat9.steeleye.com ([65.114.3.137]:51717 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263958AbTEFQQE (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2003 12:16:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20030505083315.GB8416@beaverton.ibm.com> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Anderson Cc: SCSI Mailing List , Patrick Mochel On Mon, 2003-05-05 at 03:33, Mike Anderson wrote: > Example tree: > > # tree /sys/class/scsi_host > /sys/class/scsi_host > |-- host0 > | |-- cmd_per_lun > | |-- device -> ../../../devices/pci0/00:09.0/host0 > | |-- host_busy > | |-- sg_tablesize > | |-- unchecked_isa_dma > | `-- unique_id Could you elaborate a bit more on why the host properties are under the class tree, but the scsi_device properties are under the device tree. I think this could be my misunderstanding of the class concept: I thought it was going to be a unifying abstraction, e.g. a class for all tape devices (be they SCSI, ide or the oddball qic ones) that would export a unifying interface that all tapes could use. Therefore, you have a device with a set of intrinsic properties exposed in the device tree plus a set of classes whose interfaces it chooses to export. I could see us adding a scsi_device class and moving all the device properties under there too, I suppose. What I think I'm looking for is clarification of what is a "class property" vs what is a "device property" James